寄托天下
查看: 1222|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[a习作temp] Argument47 FLY AW小组第5周作业 [复制链接]

Rank: 4

声望
0
寄托币
4328
注册时间
2005-12-4
精华
0
帖子
28
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2006-6-15 15:35:27 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览
I finished my final exams yesterday.I will try to accomplish all the task of our group and the Is and As I failed to render days ago. fighting together with you~~~


argument47 Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.


The arguer claims that the sudden cooling of the earth in the mid-sixth century was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. Firstly, the arguer assumed two possible causes: a large meteorite colliding or a volcanic eruption will result in the declining of the temperature of the earth. Sooner after, he denied the former. At last, drew a conclusion that the latter one was the right cause. However, the evidences the arguer provided , unfortunately, were not convincing to support his point of view.

One fundamental reason for the arguer is that some surviving Asian historical records of the time, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption which leads the cooling of the earth. With scrutiny of the conclusion we can find that there are not any evidences to relate a loud boom and a volcanic eruption. The loud boom, we can assume, may be caused by other reasons such as an earthquake as well as a flash. Therefore the correction of the historical records will be doubted. We can not easily say that volcanic eruption result in the cooling.

The arguer based an assumption that since there was no extant historical records of the time mention a flash, a large meteorite collision, although, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, the declining of temperature had nothing with the meteorite collision. Nevertheless, it is also unconvincing. Firstly, no extant historical records exists now does not means no records existed before. It’ s possible that the useful records had been ruined or were not to be found out yet. Besides, a sudden colliding flash may not be seen by people eyes, the flashing place may out of people’s sight. Relevant evidences like whether human knew how to record or not also lack to support its argument.


At last, even if granted that a volcanic eruption did exist, we can not ensure that the declining of the temperature is directly caused by volcanic eruption. At one hand, if the declining happened before the eruption, it will not prove the relation between the two. On the other hand, other factors may be the main causes.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because of the evidence that the boom of the eruption and the denying of the meteorite colliding.
0 0

使用道具 举报

Rank: 5Rank: 5

声望
0
寄托币
2315
注册时间
2005-8-19
精华
1
帖子
6
沙发
发表于 2006-6-15 23:10:38 |只看该作者
The arguer claims that the sudden cooling of the earth in the mid-sixth century was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. Firstly, the arguer assumed two possible causes: a large meteorite colliding or a volcanic eruption will result in the declining of the temperature of the earth. Sooner after, he denied the former. At last, drew a conclusion that the latter one was the right cause. However, the evidences the arguer provided , unfortunately, were not convincing to support his point of view.

One fundamental reason for the arguer is that some surviving Asian historical records of the time, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption which leads the cooling of the earth. With scrutiny of the conclusion we can find that there are not any evidences to relate a loud boom and a volcanic eruption. The loud boom, we can assume, may be caused by other reasons such as an earthquake as well as a flashflash是指闪电么?应该是打雷thunder吧. Therefore the correction of the historical records will be doubted. We can not easily say that volcanic eruption result in the cooling.我觉得这样说有一些问题,因为这段内容其实主要是在论证such a large eruption存在的可能性,还没有牵涉到其与cooling的关系。

这里加一个承接词比较好吧The arguer based an assumption that since there was no extant historical records of the time mention a flash, a large meteorite collision, although, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, the declining of temperature had nothing with the meteorite collision. Nevertheless, it is also unconvincing. Firstly, no extant historical records exists now does not means no records existed before. It’ s possible that the useful records had been ruined or were not to be found out yet. Besides, a sudden colliding flash may not be seen by people eyes, the flashing place may out of people’s sight.我觉得像这样的对历史时期进行假设的话,用虚拟语气会比较好 Relevant evidences like whether human knew how to record or not also lack to support its指代不明 argument.


At last, even if granted that a volcanic eruption did exist, we can not ensure that the declining of the temperature is directly caused by volcanic eruption. At one hand, if the declining happened before the eruption, it will not prove the relation between the two. On the other hand, other factors may be the main causes.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because of the evidence that the boom of the eruption and the denying of the meteorite colliding.

我觉得楼主并没有把原题的逻辑弄得很清楚,说实话这道题的确比较掺杂不清,但是仔细看看还是有比较明确的逻辑顺序的。
首先global cooling=a dimming of the sun
然后the dimming=a large dust cloud
最后the dust cloud=a large eruption
于是global cooling=eruption
我是这样理解的
于是要反驳,就等于一次划掉三个等号,也就是反驳三个等号成立的原因
楼主认为呢?


[ 本帖最后由 夜一 于 2006-6-15 23:18 编辑 ]

使用道具 举报

Rank: 4

声望
0
寄托币
4328
注册时间
2005-12-4
精华
0
帖子
28
板凳
发表于 2006-6-16 11:36:03 |只看该作者
恩, 我发现我忽略了前面两个 而仅仅就最后一个问题在绕来绕去,所以感觉写不了多少...
看了你的文章后才恍然大悟一下,自己当时怎么没发现了。。。

a的逻辑还要慢慢来找...

使用道具 举报

RE: Argument47 FLY AW小组第5周作业 [修改]

问答
Offer
投票
面经
转发
转发该帖子
Argument47 FLY AW小组第5周作业
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-479426-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
回顶部